From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 29
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:27:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807302127.42148.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080730021947.def99edc.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wednesday 30 July 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:06:50 +0200 Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > * Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> [2008-07-29 21:48]:
> > > > Isn't this the opposite end of the same problem for which Bernhard
> > > > has been repeatedly trying to find a taker for his patch:
> > > >
> > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kexec/1882
> > >
> > > Yes. It's not the kobject patch at fault here, it's the use of kobjects
> > > so early in the boot process. That needs to be fixed.
>
> It was a bit optimistic to stick an unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocation
> into the previously-atomic kobject_init().
>
> It's only 128 bytes, so why can't we fix both problems thusly?
Fixes the bug for me (also true for previous patch from Bernhard).
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-30 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-29 7:23 linux-next: Tree for July 29 Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-29 7:48 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2008-07-29 14:45 ` Dominik Brodowski
2008-08-03 14:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-04 7:58 ` Dominik Brodowski
2008-07-29 16:25 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-07-29 18:16 ` Greg KH
2008-07-29 20:49 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-07-30 4:48 ` Greg KH
2008-07-30 7:06 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-30 9:19 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-30 19:27 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2008-07-30 20:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-30 23:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 23:44 ` Greg KH
2008-08-07 1:08 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-07 3:40 ` Greg KH
2008-08-07 6:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 1:05 ` linux-next: usb tree fix (Was: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 29) Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 19:38 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-07-29 7:36 linux-next: Tree for July 29 Stephen Rothwell
2010-07-29 4:32 Stephen Rothwell
2011-07-29 7:38 Stephen Rothwell
2011-07-30 11:38 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-07-30 16:08 ` Arnaud Lacombe
2011-07-30 16:16 ` Sedat Dilek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807302127.42148.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bwalle@suse.de \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox